Modernist term not applicable?

[Kephapaulos]

This video is so dumb and ridiculous. I found it infuriating because these indultarians still don't get it and want to save face wherever they can to salvage the modernist sect thinking it is the Catholic Church. It's too bad because I have liked this man's history talks and other stories, but he falls tremendously short here. They're just so scared of being labeled schismatic and radical. This reminds me also of when Riverrun told Michael Lofton that modernists do not actually exist anymore.

[Michael Wilson]

If they want us to retire the word, then get rid of those who are spreading the errors.

[james03]

I didn't finish it.  Classic midwittery. 

He quotes from a guy who talks about using the vulgar language at Mass, whom this narrator clearly says is a modernist.  Yet later he says that destroying the Mass and replacing it with the Vulgar Rite at Vee Poo is not modernist.  He also clearly didn't understand that the modernist quotes he read were talking about PRACTICAL subversive methods.

Now it is true we are dealing with a different demonic beast today than during Vee Poo.  Essentially the modernists, from pride, were embarrassed by the "scientists", especially with regards to evolution.  So they tried to concoct theories to make the Church relevant given their belief in evolution.  Idiots, if they had just waited in Faith until science to progress to the point where evolution is revealed to be a clown car theory of absurdity, they would have avoided going to hell.  But I digress.

So the modernists denied certain dogmas and worked around until they finally got their heretical council, and made their changes.

However a smarter bunch came along, the post-modernists, especially the ones infected with bolshevism, and said, "You are correct that the Traditional Church is absurd, however how do we know YOU are correct?

And thus you end up with the will to power as the only standard, in which case it is the magical "collective" will for the bolsheviks, and we end up with the Church being reduced to an insignificant gay rights NGO.

This guy calls himself a Trad, I wonder what his position is on Vee Poo, as he keeps talking about the "post" counciliar reformers.

And yes, the revolution is always evolving.  No $h!t.  This is what I mean about midwittery.

[KreKre]

And yes, the revolution is always evolving.

That is an extremely important point. One can't really compare modernists from the time of st. Pius X to modernists today. Had those old modernists been shown a vision of the future, they would probably think that their revolution has gone too far. What was once outrageous and unthinkable, today is normal. The fact this viewpoint evolves so much is a clear sign of false theology. No heresy can stand the test of time, it always needs to be adjusted, modified, brought again and again in conformity with the modern times. And it just gets worse and more immoral. Progress.

True dogma is always true, its truth does not change in time. This is because it reflects God, who is eternal and cannot change.

[james03]

Dude comes across as a recent Neo Catholic convert.  Still living in denial.  Full of cognitive dissonance.

So here are the facts:

Vatican II was absolutely Modernist Fest.

Tradition is a rejection of Vatican II and Modernism, not an attachment to the "old" Mass.

He'll eventually get there.

[KreKre]

Tradition is a rejection of Vatican II and Modernism, not an attachment to the "old" Mass.

Tradition is all that, sure, but it is much more. It is a realization that answers to eternal questions never change. This is because this answer is always God, and He cannot change. So whatever anyone teaches now, if it contradicts what God has revealed and Church taught in the past, it must be false. Our knowledge of this can deepen with time, and our understanding of it can evolve, as men continue to pray and think about these things, and indeed it has over the centuries, but the new can never contradict the old.

That is why we say: "as it was in the beginning, is now, and ever shall be. Amen." instead of "last week it used to be that way, but this week the Synod decided that it is this way, and who knows what shall be next week."

[Jmartyr]

They are living in the Twilight Zone. I was watching a video on U-tube with a boomer-relative about Francis supposedly having visions of the Virgin. Just a bunch of platitudes about saying the rosary and going to church. The boomer was crying their eyes out and when I got indignant about such bs, they got mad at me instead of a fake video about the heretical Francis receiving apparitions. 

[james03]

Imagine Fr. Ripperger with Fr. Hesse, in a room with a roaring fire (it's winter), enjoying a fine Chianti Classico Riserva, smoking some quality Honduran cigars.  In that context I can see a discussion of modernism vs. post modernism.  They kick it around.  See if there is some insight that might help the counter revolution.  Fine.

But for regular Catholics, this boils down to pedantry.

And there is still the red flag of his apparent denial that Vee Poo was the culmination and pride of modernism.

[GMC]

Modernism works in stages, we're in a much more advanced stage than the one denounced by Pius X, it's normal that a modernist from 100 years ago would be scandalized by the modernism of 2024, also a liberal from 100 years ago would be scandalized by the liberalism of 2024.

Some progressive revolutionariest form the 70-80 now they are conservative for current standars. And current woke will be conservative by 2050 standards unless the pendulum swings in the other direction. The same with the modernism.

[Kephapaulos]

They objectively believe the same thing even if different in development and details.

They can deny it all they want that they believe heresy or the same heresy, but unless they have humility, they cannot accept the truth.

[james03]

Modernism works in stages, we're in a much more advanced stage than the one denounced by Pius X, it's normal that a modernist from 100 years ago would be scandalized by the modernism of 2024, also a liberal from 100 years ago would be scandalized by the liberalism of 2024.

I'm a hypocrite for engaging in the pedantry I just decried, but it is an interesting topic.  Modernism and post-Modernism are the same in that they both deny a permanent foundation in Tradition.  Modernism tried to replace the Scholastic foundation with one akin to evolution and "science".  They also believed in immanence, and such mumbo-jumbo in their attempt to create a relevant religion in the world where evolution was a "fact".  The post-modernists have thrown the whole thing out and basically don't believe in any absolute Truth (functionally atheist), only the truth of the bolshevik proletariat.  The post-modernists are actually more logical, reaching the necessary conclusions of the modernist premise.

And if you want to get really philosophical, this probably ties into the Kantian denial of Transcendentals, equating them with tautology.  No, they are the first principle, their cause is God, and is God, because His existence is His essence.  Therefore the Church He founded is the Rock and the Pillar of Faith and can not change, because He Is.

Some progressive revolutionariest form the 70-80 now they are conservative for current standars.

Case in point, Cardinal Mueller denies the bodily resurrection of Christ.  He's is a modernist.  And yet he is considered a "conservative" battling Bergoglio.